Docket No: 4881-19 
Ref: Signature date 
 
   
Dear : 
 
This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552.  After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board) found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.  Consequently, your application has been denied.     
 
Although your application was not filed in a timely manner, the Board found it in the interest of justice to waive the statute of limitations and consider your application on its merits.  A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 July 2020.  The names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.  Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board.  Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, relevant portions of your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. 
  
You enlisted in the Marine Corps and began a period of active duty on 19 November 1982.   On 20 September 1983, you were counseled for unsatisfactory performance on guard duty during a field exercise.  On 9 January 1984, you were not recommended for promotion.  On 1 September 1984, nonjudicial punishment (NJP) was imposed on you for Failure to Go.   On 6 November 1984, you were not recommended for promotion.  On 17 December 1984, you were not recommended for promotion.  On 11 March 1985, you were not recommended for promotion.   On 8 May 1985, you were counseled for substandard sense of urgency, lackadaisical attitude and substandard appearance.  On 5 June 1985, NJP was imposed on you for Failure to Go, Sleeping on Post and Violation of Lawful Order.  On 7 April 1986, you were not recommended for promotion.   On 3 July 1986, you were convicted at a Summary Court-Martial of Unauthorized Absence and Failure to Obey a Lawful Order.  On 20 November 1986, charges were preferred Unauthorized Absence, Assault on an NCO, Disobeying a Lawful Order of an NCO and Disrespect to an NCO were preferred against you.  On 25 November 1986, you signed a request for Separation in Lieu of Trial (SILT).   The Commanding Officer (CO), 1st Battalion 2d Marines, and CO, 2d Marines, recommended approval. On 1 December 1986, the Staff Judge Advocate to the Convening Authority found the package legally sufficient.  On 2 December 1986, the Convening Authority approved the request and directed your administrative separation with an OTH discharge.  On 9 December 1986, you were separated with an OTH discharge.   
 
You requested an upgrade of your discharge. In your request, you stated that you served your country with honor and deserve an appropriate discharge. You asserted that you never received a hearing on the alleged charges, served four years on active duty and were separated unjustly.  The Board considered these factors and assertions, and concluded that they were not sufficient to warrant a change to your discharge given the totality of the circumstances.  The Board noted that you waived your rights to trial and an administrative board and thus, waived your procedural rights in connection with your administrative separation.  By doing so, you gave up your first, and best, opportunity to advocate for retention or a more favorable characterization of service.   
 
It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that favorable action cannot be taken.  You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon submission of new matters, which will require you to complete and submit a new DD Form 149.  New matters are those not previously presented to or considered by the Board.  In this regard, it is important to keep in mind that a presumption of regularity attaches to all official records.  Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.   
 
Sincerely,